User talk:TomRoskilly

Orphaned non-free media (File:Domain Security - Key Fob.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Domain Security - Key Fob.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Rushton2010 (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Domain Safe.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Domain Safe.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Frank Domains


A tag has been placed on Frank Domains, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the page be "userfied" or emailed to you. Bob Re-born (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013
Hello, TomRoskilly. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. ''As someone connected with Frank Domains you should not be editing articles related to it on Wikipedia. Please stop. '' Bob Re-born (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Domain Safe.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Domain Safe.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bob Re-born (talk) 22:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Domain Security


A tag has been placed on Domain Security, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the page be "userfied" or emailed to you. Bob Re-born (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

If unblocked, do you intend to continue writing articles about your employer? If so, please read WP:COI and describe how you plan on declaring your conflict of interest, and how you plan on writing an unbiased, non-promotional article. If you don't intend to continue writing an article with which you have a conflict of interest, then please describe what other activities you plan on doing. ‑Scottywong | yak _ 14:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I was about to decline - then realized that I'm the blocking admin. From the above unblock, it appears I was 100% correct with this block: your intent is to WP:SPAM this project.  There is already a slight description of the hijacking of the .gl domain in that article - that's sufficient for an encyclopedia.  Frank Domains is a minor league, non-notable company, and there's no need for such on Wikipedia (it's an encyclopedia, not a business directory).  Domain security is questionable - its a slight step up from a dictionary definition, and that's being generous.  As your sole intent is to promote your company and your "product" - even though you claim to have read the relevant policies - there's no real need to have you on Wikipedia (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:40, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

My Intentions going forward
I have spent the week going through as much of WP's guidelines and general MO as I could lay my hands on. I understand that I came onto Wikipedia for the wrong reasons. As far as I was concerned, WP was where I came for all my info, so it seemed the logical place to post info of my employer. In all honesty, there is no pressing reason for me, in this capacity, to use WP, other than to tweek various industry pages to ensure that they remain current and accurate.

I would still like Wikipedia to have information relating to Frank Domains, but it is clear that I am not the person to create such an article. I have not hidden my agenda from the start, so in maters of conflicts of interest, I am more than willing to state my relationship to the material (employee of business). I would definitely offer up any contributions for review before making potential COI revisions, something I intend to do with anything I write. It seems to be the best way to ensure a fully researched and unbiased article.

The topics which I am most saddened to see deleted are as follows:
 * Frank Domains
 * Domain Security
 * .gl Gloucestershire Domain

As mentioned above, I am not really in any position to start creating a Frank Domains page, but I am keen to submit Domain Security and .gl to be reviewed by a bunch of editors. They are not covered in much detail, but I think it is important that they are allowed to be addressed.

I can provide any information pertaining to these subjects as well as where to find the various morsels of information ( as mentioned they are scantily covered...in the literary sense).

Please respond with further suggestions or questions pertaining to my new intentions. Thank you all for being so patient with me.

‑TomRoskilly‑ (Talk) 11:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Frank Domains is a company profiting from the sale of the .gl domain in the UK, and the domain security devices. Given your position in the company there is no way you should be writing anything about these. I think the only way you are likely to get unblocked is by promising to stay away from the entire topic of internet domains. --Bob Re-born (talk) 23:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That is a definite possibility, one which I would like to discuss. It seems to be THE logical step forward after my disregard for Wikipedian values, except in terms of practicality. As an expert in a certain field am I only allowed to edit in articles which are unrelated to my expert knowledge? Please advise. ‑TomRoskilly‑ (Talk)15:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a definite difference between "editing a subject matter within your area of knowledge" and "making edits that highlight or promote my work or my business". For example, as I note above, the highjacking of the .gl domain is a pretty minor concept overall.  You can write about encyclopedic subjects that you have knowledge about - you can neither promote an entity or concept, nor can you link to you or your business, especially as a source (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:52, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I can appreciate that difference. For future knowledge, can I ask what you meant in regards to the .gl domain hijacking? Was that a breach of wiki values, or was it removed due to my block? Thank you for taking the time to help me like this, it is extremely appreciated. ‑TomRoskilly‑ (Talk)13:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Second Chance Appropriate?
In my ( non-admin and back row of the peanut gallery) opinion, template:second chance might be appropriate here. Just my $0.02. Tazerdadog (talk) 06:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

He's a COI spammer, whose post block comments have not demonstrated an understanding of the wrongdoing or any intention to change if unblocked. --Bob Re-born (talk) 17:37, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Out of interest, what would you class as intention to change? I am engaging with you to learn how to improve my practices, I have accepted that what I did was wrong and not in keeping with the values upheld by Wikipedia and I haven't just rerouted my IP, created a new account and started up again. I am here willing and actively learning, taking time out of my busy day so that I can learn how to use Wikipedia with honesty, integrity and without Conflicts of Interest. I am very grateful to you all for taking time out of your busy days to help me to become a better Wikipedia user, but what is the point of your efforts to enlighten me if I'm not allowed to return to Wikipedia where I can use this new knowledge?

Having re-read this message, I realise that it may come across as aggressive. This is not the case, I would not assume to be anything but contrite in this situation. Thank you again for your help. ‑TomRoskilly‑ (Talk)13:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Domain Security concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Domain Security, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Domain Security


Hello TomRoskilly. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Domain Security".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 04:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)